“While catechizing was a familiar part of church life in both England and Scotland, English pastors were particularly adept in their composition and use. At least twelve [Westminster] Assembly members had published catechisms in England before 1643, and every clerical member was thoroughly acquainted with the duty and art of catechizing” (John R. Bower, The Larger Catechism: A Critical Text and Introduction, 4).

Last month’s published poem at the Paper Mill.

“What age, what place was there ever, which has not just cause to complain of subjects’ rebellion, children’s disobedience, and wives’ presumption? Therefore, the apostle does not without cause first declare the duties of subordinates [see Ephesians 5:22ff]. Besides, the apostle teaches those who are under authority, how to influence those in authority over them to deal equally and kindly, not harshly and cruelly, namely, by endeavoring to perform their own duty first. For what provokes wrath, rage, and fury in governors? What makes them that have authority deal roughly and rigorously? Is it not for the most part disobedience and stubbornness in those that are under government? Though some in authority are so proud, so savage, and inhumane, that no honor done to them, no performance of duty, can satisfy and content them. They will reward evil for goodness, like David’s enemies (Ps. 38:20). Yet, the best general direction that can be prescribed to subordinates to provoke their governors to deal well with them, is that subordinates themselves be careful and conscientious in doing their duty first. Even if their governors on earth are not moved by that, the highest Lord in heaven will graciously accept it” (William Gouge, Building a Godly Home, Vol. 1, 26).

“There is a great reason that all service should be limited by the fear of God. God is the highest Lord to whom all service primarily and principally is due; whatever service is due to any man, high or low, is due in and for the Lord. The Lord has set superiors in the high places where they bear the image of God. The Lord also has set subordinates in their places, and commended them as His charge to the government of those who are over them. He that does not obey those who are over him in the fear of God, shows no respect of God’s image, and he who does not govern those who are under him in the fear of God shows no respect for God’s charge” (William Gouge, Building a Godly Home, Vol. 1, 15).

“The fountain of salvation itself in the eternal election of the Father is “in Christ.” Paul says: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenlies in Christ, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1:3, 4). The Father elected from eternity, but he elected in Christ. We are not able to understand all that is involved, but the fact is plain enough that there was no election of the Father in eternity apart from Christ. And that means that those who will be saved were not even contemplated by the Father in the ultimate counsel of his predestinating love apart from union with Christ–they were chosen in Christ. As far back as we can go in tracing salvation to its fountain we find “union with Christ”; it is not something tacked on; it is there from the outset” (John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied, 162).

“Nothing is more central or basic than union or communion with Christ. . . . Union with Christ is really the central truth of the whole doctrine of salvation not only in its application but also in its once-for-all accomplishment in the finished work of Christ. Indeed the whole process of salvation has its origin in one phase of union with Christ and salvation has in view the realization of other phases of union with Christ. This can be readily seen if we remember that brief expression which is so common in the New Testament, namely, “in Christ.” It is that which is meant by “in Christ” that we have in mind when we speak of “Union with Christ.” It is apparent that Scripture applies the expression “in Christ” to much more than the application of redemption” (John Murray, Redemption: Accomplished and Applied, 161).

“Two things are remarkable, at least to the modern observer, about this list [of the author-annotators] and the Annotations–on the one hand, the list was broadly constructed, drawing not only on the Presbyterian and independent constituencies of the Parliament that would be called together into the Westminster Assembly, but also on the Episcopalian, and indeed, Royalist constituency that would not contribute to the Assembly and its standards. In the latter group we count Ussher and Richardson, both bishops in Ireland; Featley, and Smallwood. On the other hand, the annotators remained anonymous in the published text: despite the eminence of many of the contributors, their names were not listed in the prefaces, nor were they affixed to the commentaries on the various books of the Bible”(Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 21-22).

“Their [the annotators] intention had not been to produce an original work, but rather a standard commentary that drew on the already sizable and significant Reformed exegetical tradition (Richard A. Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship, 19).

“The context for understanding the Westminster Confession is, certainly, the exegetical and doctrinal heritage of the Reformation as presented through the interpretive glass of the English and Scot Reformed theology of the mid-seventeenth century, which was itself part of the larger phenomenon that has been called ‘international Calvinism'” (Richard A Muller and Rowland S. Ward, Scripture and Worship: Biblical Interpretation and the Directory for Worship,  9).

“Charles II once asked John Owen (1616-1683), “the prince of Puritans,” why he went  to hear the preaching of the unlearned tinker of Bedford, John Bunyan. Owen responded, “May it please your majesty, could I possess the tinker’s abilities for preaching, I would willingly relinquish all my learning” (Andrew Thomson, “Life of Dr. Owen,” in The Works of John Owen, 1:xcii, quoted in Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology, 712).